Re: #correspondencetables - what needs to be done? #correspondencetables

Brandon Kuczenski

I think the correspondence tables should just be converted to RDF for entry into the database. In my understanding, there is nothing a correspondence table does that an RDF database does not also do.

The necessary tasks would be to identify the appropriate predicates to describe the relationships. This crosses into the #ontology discussion, and is outside my expertise anyway, but the #skos ontology seems to have some of the right terms in its mappingRelations superclass For instance: skos:exactMatch and skos:closeMatch seem like good candidates.

Again I am outside my direct experience, but in the example table here:
I would do something like the following, to encode the first row of the table:
Note the difference between the "rdf" vocabulary and the "rdfs" vocabulary.

rdf =
rdfs =
(default) = https://uri.for.bonsai.namespace

 - Within the BONSAI namespace, create new signifiers for the collections between which the correspondence is made, like

FAO_products rdf:type skos:Collection
EXIOBASE_products rdf:type skos:Collection

 - Then for each row in the example, create a signifier and assign its label

FAO_Agave_fibres_nes skos:member FAO_products
FAO_Agave_fibres_nes rdfs:label "Agave fibres nes"

 - Similarly for each column:

EXIOBASE_plant_based_fibres skos:member EXIOBASE_products
EXIOBASE_plant_based_fibres rdfs:label "Plant-based fibres"

 - Then add the relationship

FAO_Agave_fibres_nes skos:closeMatch EXIOBASE_plant_based_fibres

Somebody correct me if I'm off base, but I think this is how we move from XLS to RDF.

Join to automatically receive all group messages.